So close, only a few days before graduation, a couple homework assignments, a couple presentations, a couple exams… inexpressible joy! The completion of years of work, more for some than others, the respect of society, the door of opportunity, but what is it really worth?

A degree from a respectable and accredited university like OSU gives you a certain potential success in our society. OSU’s propaganda puts it, “Open minds. Open doors.” In ‘Good Will Hunting’, Will makes a rather amusing but true argument that we are wasting thousands of dollars on an education that we could have realized for $1.50 in late charges at the library, the retort though, “But I will have a degree, and you’ll be serving my kids fries at a drive through on our way to a skiing trip.” A common reason why we’re pushed by everyone and motivated ourselves to come here, but when you sent your application to OSU, were you considering at all the real benefits and the real costs?

Upon receipt of a diploma, the average student will have given OSU $25,000 directly in tuition, and actually incurred $73,200 in costs. This should be considered a minimum cost as it is figured for an undergraduate, resident, 4-year program, and also doesn’t include miscellaneous items. Items that you won’t find in the OSU admissions financial aid information like: engineering fees, lab fees, honors college fees, parking passes each year, four to five parking tickets at $20-40 each, that new laptop when you started and the second one you had to get when the first one broke down Junior year, a couple trips to Shasta and maybe one to Cancun, hospital and doctors visits (cause no one ever uses Student Health Services after trying them once), gifts, dates and such with your significant other, and a slew of other things that involve just life in our society.

This means the average OSU student will have to come up with $100,000 to cover four years at this institution. Now, I had great summer jobs, but none of them came close to paying enough to balance these kinds of numbers. Many of us come from middle-class families that aren’t going to possible be able to spare $25,000 per year, or in that case even $500 per year. For the sake of argument, lets say the average student eats a lot of mac-n-cheese and top-ramen and attends a good portion of the fall and spring barbeques that occur all over campus, bringing the their total graduation debt to $50,000. A fairly manageable student debt amount (or at least that’s what everyone says).

Student loan interest rates are as random as Oregon weather but let’s take an average of 6% per year compounded monthly.  When you start making payments after graduation and if you got the kind of loan that doesn’t accrue interest while you’re in school, then you’re going to be paying $358 each month for 20 years. After ten years of making payments you’re doing pretty well financially and decide to pay off your student loans, guess how much you owe? It’s not a straight forward calculation due to the time value of money, interest, inflation, etc. You would first have to make sure there’s no penalty for paying off the loan early, but assuming they haven’t done that to you, after ten years of making payments you would have paid $25,260 in interest and your remaining principle you would have to pay off is $32,300. The point is, this education is costing you a lot in strict financial terms, and will continue to cost you long into your future; but what about intrinsic cost?

Everyone experiences college with their share of good times and also plenty of moments we’d rather just forget. There are a lot of people on this campus in pain, and I don’t mean just physical. I see people every day with burdens, dark thoughts and heavy problems, the drama of life in general, the challenges of a student’s life, the loss that accompanies an attack on your spiritual foundations. It is amazing to me in just how many ways a human can experience pain, common examples that come to mind for me are personal, a sharp word at or from someone you love or a D- on a physics exam.

But even the things that I have mentioned are small and trivial in the scope of one’s life, or even in comparison to what many of you are remembering right now. How these things are dealt with, how they shape you, what you learn from them, that is what is going to define your cost and your gain from your time at OSU.

Ask yourself, what is your motivation? Why are you here? One thing I know for absolute certain, I would not have experience success and I would not have finished this degree were it not for the grace and love of my Savior, Jesus Christ. With my last few words as a columnist for this paper, if you will humor me, I would like to tell you about my motivation, why I am here, why I am writing this, and why four years of living in the library has been worth it.

There has been multiple times when I wasn’t sure if I could finish this degree. It wasn’t a matter of intelligence; it was a matter of dedication. But to be dedicated to something requires motivation, for you have to know what you’re doing and why. I have come to understand that my purpose in finishing this degree is to love my God with all my heart and all my mind. What that means in a practical sense is that Jesus will use me to share love to those around me, to be a bearer of peace in a troubled world, to be a leader in the community setting an example of what honor and respect is supposed to look like, to be a compassionate and loving husband to my wife, to be a friend to those who are rejected by society, and to not compromise and stand firm in the truth of God Almighty. I have learned to distrust the wisdom of man. I have learned that engineering involves mostly assumptions; the fundamental assumption of science is that we really don’t know anything so it’s probably going to have to change every couple of years. There is a better source, “Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom; And to depart from evil is understanding” Job 28:28. Lean on His wisdom and you will not falter.

Without accepting Jesus’ offer we are incapable of rendering ourselves pure in the eyes of a Just and Holy God. By dying on the cross, Jesus took the punishment for what we have done wrong in our place; Jesus offers to make us blameless in God’s eyes! That is so incredible, and it is so simple. All you have to do is believe in your heart that God raised Jesus from the dead and confess with your mouth that He is Lord, and you will be saved (Romans 10:9). This is why I have written for the Liberty, that you could know the amazing, unconditional gift that Jesus offers to you by his death on the cross. I consider this degree worthless and I consider my time spent here a waste; “I consider my life worth nothing to me, if only I may finish the race and complete the task the Lord Jesus has given me – the task of testifying to the gospel of God’s grace” Acts 20:24. What is your answer? What is the purpose of your life?

Election year is upon us and everyone seems to be concerned with different issues, it is hard to define one general topic of most concern to Americans. The democratic contenders believe they have captured the heart and soul of America with the simple yet profound catchphrase ‘change’, yet as Obama, Edwards, and Hilary cat-fight over who truly is the essence of change, the point has been sorely missed. Spend a few moments watching and listening to the democratic platforms and you will quickly discover a political tactic of negativism toward the United States. We are richly blessed in this country and God has given us much to be thankful for – the basis of the liberal platforms is to take these blessings for granted. Edwards recently spent his entire speech in Iowa pointing out all the things that are wrong with our country and wrong about our country… hello? We live here too; we know what’s not working well, how about you tell us what you are actually going to do to make things better!?

Enter the Republicans… the Republican Party of late has taken the country by storm. From a quiet corner of Arkansas an intelligent and conscientious leader has stepped forward and taken the lead as the front-runner for President, his name, Mike Huckabee. Governor Huckabee will win the 2008 Presidential election because he is a true traditional Conservative with an excellent platform and already well recognized as a national leader.

• Huckabee has introduced a 9-point strategy for Immigration Enforcement and Border Security including building an interlocking surveillance camera and fence system, increasing border patrols, preventing amnesty, enforcing the law on employers, establishing an economic boarder with the passage of the Fair Tax, empowering local authorities through education and legislation like the CLEAR Act, ensuring document security which includes rejection of Mexico’s “matricula consular” card, and modernization of the process of legal immigration.
• Huckabee supports a constitutional amendment to protect the right to life and believes that Roe. v Wade should be overturned.
• Huckabee supports a Veteran’s Bill of Rights.
• Huckabee understands that “we don’t need universal health care mandated by federal edict or funded through ever higher taxes” but a restructuring of the system in order to deliver the abundant resources and care that we have in more effective ways.
• Huckabee believes that art and music are essential elements of a child’s education and has long been an advocate of increasing such programs. In 2007, he was presented with the Music for Life Award by the National Association of Music Merchants (NAMM) for his commitment to music education.
• Huckabee plans to completely eliminate all federal income and payroll taxes, essentially a shut-down of the IRS and restructuring of the tax system.
• Huckabee has stated that “the first thing I will do as President is send Congress my comprehensive plan for energy independence. We will achieve energy independence by the end of my second term.” Along with energy, Huckabee has made a point of the importance of also maintaining food independence and providing for the agricultural needs of our future.
• Huckabee will fight for an amendment to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
• Huckabee stands with our troops and with our generals and believes that their courage and efforts in Iraq are providing a window of opportunity for the Iraqi government to succeed while the Democrats, in perfect French fashion, are unfurling their white flags and succumbing to the terrorist’s strategy of the terror.
• Huckabee has a strong and consistent record on defending the Second Amendment; as would be expected of a good man from Arkansas.
• Huckabee is well versed in the intricacies of foreign policy and has visited the Middle East extensively over the past thirty-five years, including nine trips to Israel. He is a steadfast supporter of Israel and promises to ensure that Israel has access to the state-of-the-art weapons and technology she needs to defend herself from those who seek her annihilation. “The United States must remain true to its long-standing commitment to the Israeli people.”
• Huckabee was recognized by Time Magazine as one of the five best governors in America partially because of his timely and effective crisis management skills in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, directing the rescue and relief effort of 75,000 victims.

In recent elections the words “value-voters” have been spat with vehemence by social and religious liberals who in essence are angry because they simply don’t understand what’s happening. The more that Democrats try to downplay and spurn ‘value-voters’, the more they marginalize the intelligence and faith of the core community of Americans, the more they will find they have lost touch with what America is really about. ‘Value-voters’ care about morality and ethics far more than foreign policy, taxes, immigration or any other superfluous concern – and for a very good reason. The realities of a government systems and policies are defined by the values and doctrines of their authors; Huckabee understands this and as such clings to a long tradition of upstanding citizens fighting for justice and truth. Popular culture within our society has produced rhetoric of some abstract idea that our government, leaders, and policy makers should have some Picasso-like separation of between their faith and the decisions they make. The reality is that everyone has a worldview, religious, atheist, or otherwise. Huckabee said it best, “My faith doesn’t influence my decisions, it drives them.”

Huckabee stands as an educated man, firm in his doctrine, a trained Christian minister, a public servant with years of experience, a family man who understands both the privilege and responsibility of leadership. Huckabee’s campaign slogan is “Faith. Family. Freedom.” In another period of trying times for our Nation, this slogan captures the essence of the kind of morals, the kind of character, the kind of man America needs as President. Vote Huckabee for President!

All quotations taken from http://www.mikehuckabee.com

According to Title IX, Education Amendments of 1972 section 1681.a, “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity…”

 I propose that Oregon State University is in direct violation of this amendment and will illustrate through examples and citation several of the specific forms of this discrimination.

As reported by USA Today, “There are more men than women ages 18-24 in the USA — 15 million vs. 14.2 million, according to a Census Bureau estimate last year. But nationally, the male/female ratio on campus today is 43/57…”  A triumph for women’s advancement to be sure, but these numbers raise the question of possible neglect of the majority. Theoretically if we are truly treating the genders equally in society the male/female campus ratio should reflect the census ratio. It very obviously does not and logically should not when considering the vast disparity of concern in higher education for male advocacy.

With the creation of a new Director position here at Oregon State the trend of increased marginalization and sexism continues at the highest level.  According to an email sent out to all students on September 17, Donna Champeau became the new Director of Women’s Advancement.  This position plays an integral role in the governing institutions of OSU to advocate and protect women’s rights.  In a time of increasing student cost for higher education, why does Oregon State feel the need to allocate valuable resources to such a position?

In conversation with Donna she informed me that the position had been created as a result of various studies and data that had been collected over several years. Research into these studies revealed numerous startling discoveries. Not only did the data clearly display a disparity between the treatment of men and women at Oregon State, the disparity is in favor of women. One of the leading arguments for the continued supposed subjugation of women is the “pay-gap” or the idea that women make less than men; the table below summarizes some of the information provided by the President’s Commission on the Status of Women here at OSU:

Colleges in which women receive a higher mean salary than men:

Professors

· College of Agricultural Sciences

· College of Engineering

·College of Liberal Arts

Associate Professors

·College of Business

·College of Engineering

·College of Forestry

·College of Health and Human Sciences

·College of Oceanic & Atmospheric Sciences

·College of Science

·College of Veterinary Medicine

While there are colleges in which men receive a higher salary there are certainly many cases in which women are making more than men. The very fact that we must investigate this issue shows the level of sexist thinking that spurns these studies. Why should it matter how much men or women are making on average? It should be natural that in some cases women will have a higher mean salary and in some cases men will have a higher salary based on qualification, education, experience, etc. If we were truly interested in equality would this even be an issue?

Further investigation into the OSU climate study revealed a lack of any serious equation of gender based issues in regard to a specific domination of one gender over the other. From the very foundation of the report the data is flawed as 65.9% of the population surveyed were women, pointedly skewing the results. The most convincing ingredients of the report are selectively chosen quotes to dramatize the numbers and infer conclusions not necessarily represented by the survey.

Perhaps OSU is concerned about its image compared to other universities as we reverse the national average with a student population comprised of 47.5% women and 52.5% men. Certainly this would be a petty and ridiculous concern but in lieu of the over-dramatization and emphasis on encouraging a diverse campus it is more than likely. However, there is an easier explanation provided by the engineering statistics; about 20% of the entire student population is engineering majors while only 15% of engineering students are women. I was unable to attain figures for the actual number of applicants but suppose only 15% of all engineering applicants are women, perhaps that is simply the number of women interested in the profession – why should we feel the need to spend exorbitant amounts of money advertising and providing special scholarships to push more women into a profession merely to make the university appear more “diverse”?

A good piece of evidence to support the idea of sexism spurned by a “diversity image complex” is the intense sexist efforts in the area of women in engineering. In an effort to increase the male/female engineering ratio Oregon State has provided a series of special programs and initiatives to make it easier and more enticing for females to apply for the engineering programs. Specific examples include the existence and operations of the Society of Women Engineers as well as various ‘women in engineering’ scholarships. While policies of this nature are openly sexist, we as a student population and educated institution rather hypocritically find it appropriate to invest resources in encouraging them.

Interestingly, many students have a hard time understanding these programs as sexist; they argue that Oregon State is simply promoting equality, tolerance, and diversity. Think what the response would be if it were announced to the entire student body over email tomorrow that a new position has been created to collaborate closely with the President, Provost, colleges, and administrative units throughout the university on men’s issues and policy initiatives; working with the Cabinet, Provost’s Council, Faculty Senate, Office of Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity, President’s Commission on the Status of Men, collective bargaining units, Associated Students of OSU, and other organizations as appropriate.

This position would also ensure an equal amount of men-only scholarships and be allocated resources to start a new Men’s Center on campus complete with a big-screen TV and couches to encourage the open discussion of the complex issues such as the increasing degradation of men in TV commercials. The Men’s Center would work to promote male education and advocate men’s concerns on issues that affect the campus.

If Oregon State was actually concerned about gender equality then equal representation would exist; without an advocate a voice cannot be heard regardless of how large or small the representative population may be. Open subjugation of the majority by the minority is the inevitable result if the minority’s cause is the only cause that is tolerated.

I am an advocate for equal treatment of men and women, I believe that men and women should be given equal opportunity; as such I am an advocate of Title IX of the Education Amendments. In summarization there are three significant sources of sexist discrimination that Oregon State needs to address in order to comply with Title IX.

• Equal scholarship opportunity based upon GPA, SAT, advanced classes, extra-curricular activities, essays, and other measures ability or excellence, with no allotment for gender preference.
• Equal entrance opportunity into various college programs and professional disciplines without gender preference.
• Equal representation with positions and societies responsible for the avocation of gender rights. If Oregon State wishes to have a women’s center then there should be a men’s center, if we have a Director of Women’s Advancement then we should have a Director of Men’s Advancement, etc.

Until these issues have been addressed Oregon State University is subject to federal administrative enforcement and in a greater sense is failing to provide equality for the majority of the staff, faculty, and population.

Religion is abhorrently mistaken. The basis of all religion past, present and future is a plan of salvation conditional upon doing more good stuff than bad.

The one exception to this “norm” is Christianity; thankfully all of us flawed humans have been offered grace instead of punishment, no matter how bad we are. The prevailing religious misconception is that if we do enough good stuff we will get into heaven because if God is good, then surely good people must be the ones that get in. This logic follows that all religion is “ok”, a means of connecting with God and establishing moral standards. There are many problems with this theology; I will address a few of them in an attempt to logically show the futility and downright stupidity of putting your faith in such a system.

How good is good enough to make it in the big cut? Who defines what the standard is? Are you good enough… can you point to someone and say, “They are!” Everyone claims they are pretty much good, I’m at least better than so and so right? Does it seem logical to base a system of beliefs on a standard that nobody knows?

Well you might argue for a set of standards that is innate in all human beings. The fact is this innate knowledge is proof of a divine creator and nothing more. We clearly have a conscience, but is it enough to define a consistent standard that will enable us to be good enough to get us into heaven? All it takes is a quick look at human history or even current events, say Islamic extremists for example, to see that the answer is most definitely no! The terrorists on 9/11 held personal convictions as strongly as I do, so what makes me right and them wrong when I say, “They are not living in paradise with virgins!”

If religion’s role is to define a method of reaching God by individual interpretation of what he might be like and what he might want us to do, then it is perfectly reasonable for me to say the chair you are sitting in is god and to worship it you need to lick this paper. Weird isn’t it? It’s called relativism and requires that you never say anybody is wrong; by this standard sacrificing babies is a valid method of getting on God’s good side.

Suppose we did define a consistent standard, the Biblical one for example, we are immediately met with a greater problem; none of us would ever make the cut! We all sin, consistently. When was the last time you broke the speed limit or cursed under your breath? How about the last time you thought sexually about that certain person you saw at the MU? We can’t reach God through living good lives! As Ephesians 2:8,9 shows us, “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith – and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God – not by works, so that no one can boast.” None of us are perfect – Galatians 2:16, “…So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.” If we could do it on our own, there would have been no need for Jesus. Galatians 2:20, “…The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!”

Jesus did not come to abolish the standard; he came to save us from having to live up to it. So the standard is there to guide us as to what we should do, not define our salvation. Galatians 3:11 explains, “Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, ‘The righteous will live by faith.’ The law is not based on faith.” The Bible defines the only standard for a perfect life, and only one person has ever lived up to that standard, Jesus.

To recap, God has provided an exclusive method to become right with him, a simple plan called salvation. The Bible tells us that we have been created by God and that he loves us. Everyone has sinned and falls short of the glory of God, to which there is a consequence – spiritual separation. We are separated from God and unable to experience his love or plan for our lives due to active disobedience or indifference to God’s will, a concept known as sin. Man has attempted to bridge this gap between us and God since the beginning of time through a philosophy and theology of good works, systems of human efforts that all inevitably fall short.

The only solution is Jesus Christ, God’s provision for our sin; John 14:6, “‘Jesus answered, ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.’” He died in our place and rose from the dead so that we can reconnect with God. This relationship begins when we accept Jesus as Savior and individually make the choice to let Him be the Lord of our lives. It is a clear choice, it is not about just intellectually knowing the plan and it is not just an emotional experience.

Romans 10:9, “For if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in you heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” Romans 10:13, “For ‘Anyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.’“ It is a decision that every human must make with no middle ground left open – it is not about whether or not you are good enough, none of us are. It is a much simpler question; do you accept Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord?

“If you want to make mistakes and fudge numbers this not the place for you. Go be a doctor; when you make a mistake as a doctor you can only kill one person at a time. As a civil engineer one mistake could kill thousands.” As I near the completion of my engineering degree at Oregon State I cannot help but reflect on these words so callously spoken in one of my first lectures. With the severe lack of any in-depth ethical conversation in our professional coursework looming over the emphasis placed on ethics in modern engineering, the contradictions of reality quickly become apparent. The recent tragedy of the bridge collapse in Minnesota has brought questions previously only quietly discussed among engineers into a harsh public eye. The purpose of this paper is to bring attention to these problems in a manner that allows for open discussions by which resolutions may be found.

The necessity of living in a physical and limited world while at the same time attempting to construct a model of that world with insufficient mathematical, scientific, and linguistic tools presents an awkward state for those inclined to try. An Engineer in particular must achieve to the best of his abilities the design, construction, and maintenance of something which, by the Second Law of Thermo Dynamics and by our limited understanding of the atomic level and the Universe in general, cannot be trusted to behave in a certain way under all known circumstances and certainly not in unknown circumstances. While at the same time this Engineer is held accountable by society for nearly all positive and negative consequences, be they controllable or not, and the performance of those things which by his hand, bear his name.

Due to this responsibility, Engineers are governed by sets of ethical guidelines to which they must swear to uphold, often times in order to receive their accreditation. The paramount, précis, and overriding ethical principal for all Engineering in my understanding may be summed as so, an Engineer must always regard Public Safety as his chief duty, supreme to anything else.

This principle is quite noteworthy; it sounds excellent on paper and eloquent in lectures. But by the test of time we know this principle to be lacking. Does it account for the realities of “lesser evils”? Who decides what the subjective definition of “Public Safety” is? Beyond that, who decides what is in the best interest of the public within that definition? If the matter is subjective, who is the Engineer accountable to? Who will know if the Engineer really knew better, but kept it a secret for some personal gain? What happens when no one is there with a red pen to check his numbers and catch him when he fudged a decimal point?

The Troubling Trio

Rather than philosophize and bore you in an effort to perform a sufficient analysis and response to those questions perhaps a series of relatable examples would be more effective and intellectually entertaining. In the interest of the foregone conclusion here is my “Troubling Trio” of ethical conundrums by which a few hours may easily be lost in discussion.

Case One

As the second phase of the Reser Stadium expansion project nears completion final checks are being made, plans evaluated one last time. You run a set of calculations on a section of seating and find that the current design is acceptable; however, an additional column would be in the best interest of safety. If you choose to make this an issue the construction of this column will delay the opening of the stadium a week past schedule as it will have to be specially ordered and fabricated, interrupting the football season. Is it worth dealing with all those problems for a column that based on your past experience probably isn’t necessary? The resulting failures in timing and budgeting would reflect in your resume, while no mention of the extra precautions you took would ever be mentioned. You’ve built to this factor of safety on small office buildings before but this is a stadium…

Case Two

On Wednesday August 1, 2007 the I-35W highway bridge over the Mississippi River in Minneapolis collapsed during evening rush hour. The eight-lane, 1,950-feet-long bridge fell into the water bringing dozens of vehicles down with it and killing 13 people. The bridge was listed as “structurally deficient” starting in 1990 which puts it on par with at least 70,000 other bridges in the U.S. but that doesn’t mean that it was or should have been closed to traffic. The Van Buren bridge leading out of Corvallis onto highway 34 has a structural rating of 44.7 out of 100 and classifies as “functionally obsolete”, worse than the bridge in Minnesota.

People are upset by the collapse of a bridge and rightfully so, society trusts that our infrastructure has been designed and is maintained by excellent engineering and there is an expectation that things do not fail. The bigger question on peoples mind is who is ultimately responsible for the collapse? Was it the state who didn’t decide that major work should be done until the scheduled replacement in 2020? Or perhaps the Engineer who designed the bridge as a deck steel truss-arch bridge which doesn’t have much redundancy in the design and is prone to corrosion due to the contact between steel and concrete in a region where road crews dump corrosive ice melter on roadways by the ton in winter? Or perhaps the Engineers who performed the annual inspections since 1993 should have voiced greater concern? Or was there faulty construction that eventually led to fatigue cracking or some other oversight during construction?

But the ultimate ethical question raised by the Minneapolis bridge collapse, regardless of the exact reason of the collapse, who is accountable for that loss of life? Regardless of the exact reason, I guarantee that at least in his own heart the Engineer who designed the bridge feels the blood of those 13 people on his hands…

Case Three

This particular case is hard to think about, it is a story that has been around for some time, verification as to whether or not it is purely fictional is not available. You are the chief engineer of a bridge system, it is your job to work the control booth to raise and lower the bridge for transition between train traffic and ships passing underneath. One day your son is with you on the job for a while, as you concentrate on raising the bridge for a ship and lowering it again for a passenger train that is scheduled shortly your son is off playing. Suddenly you hear a scream and run outside the booth to see your son with his arm caught in the gear system. You run over to him and quickly realize to horrifying situation; if you take the time to extract your son from the gears, you won’t be able to lower the bridge and the passenger train full of hundreds of people could plunge into the river. If you decide lower the bridge to save the train your son will be crushed to death in the gears. What do you do?

If you will allow me to interject a few of my own thoughts regarding the troubling trio I would appreciate a willing ear. In my mind these questions cannot simply be a subjective question of “what is in the best interest of the general safety of the public.” Rather they must be governed by a higher order, a set of values which in a tangible way governs morality decisively. There cannot be a subjective moral code or moral law that governs all of us, if we approach the troubling trio from this liberally acclaimed perspective I fear we are bound to a system of beliefs which justifies anything so long as it doesn’t justify in contradiction to another’s beliefs.

I am convinced that the higher moral code or tao as C.S. Lewis so craftily discusses it may be found in written form describe in articulate detail in the Bible. For something so powerful it surprises when one finds that such a thing may be summed into one word – love. What does it truly mean to “love your neighbor as yourself” and to esteem those around in higher regard? What does it mean to share the love of Christ? True love is patient, kind, and long-suffering… love cares about others, love is unselfish; Love is the greatest commandment.

As an Engineer I do not regard the safety of the public as my highest duty; rather I regard that as a small part of the commandment to love those around me. To love my neighbor as myself, to love my wife as Christ loves the church, and to love and respect my fellow man enough to disregard all my personal desires in favor of those around me. I propose the perspective of ultimate regard for others instead of self as the beginning of a solution to the troubling trio and any ethical question that we may encounter.

1 ) Welcome! I’m pleased to introduce you to a fine university and four years full of potential, now brace yourself; you are about to enter a realm of society not experienced before, a new neighborhood of thousands of faces, ideas, and emotions. Everyone has an opinion, few have an open mind. Remember, you are not here to think critically but rather to regurgitate the information your professors deem important. Sound a lot like high school? Well yes, unless you find those few classes such as Dr. Ferngren’s HC 407, C.S. Lewis and the Problem of Evil”, which actually do encourage opposing viewpoints and will reward you for any effort in reasoning beyond the classroom. While at first you may feel like this is ridiculous – to be jumping through hoops once again – your ideals of great learning at a university seem contradictory to this manner of education, and of course you would be right; however, you will not succeed long with that mindset. Several years of failed personal attempts to break through this paradigm of intolerance has only led to a lower than deserved GPA and countless papers with red lines marking differing perspectives as “irrelevant.”

2 ) Never bow to the alter of tolerance and diversity. You will quickly discover the extraordinary catering this institution does for the ‘minorities’ and ‘under-represented’; with your rising student fees Oregon State plans to provide more “gender neutral” bathroom signs and encourage more open explorations with your sexuality with disgusting displays during the queer pride week. If you’re Conservative or Christian voice is being discriminated against at any time, please feel free to express that, but be aware that you are then unquestionably sexist, racist, homophobic, and intolerant, or some combination thereof. If you mention the fact that by the very nature of tolerance you must disagree with someone or something in order to ‘tolerate’ it, be aware that you will now be labeled close-minded and could be potentially blamed for harassment.

3 ) Prepare to see your student fees waste away into all kinds of things that you will never use. Regardless of the fact that the campus ministries are used by students an incredible amount more than all the cultural centers combined, don’t expect to get any kind of “Christian” program funded. Last spring OSU Campus Crusade for Christ organized one of the largest university relief teams in the nation to go to New Orleans and labor through nasty conditions on the beginning phases of restoration on homes. Oregon State in no way would officially recognize the group, nor would OSU sponsor or help fund the relief effort, or even allow for any kind of public attention or recognition to help bring in support from the community. Your student fees will also waste into other ‘services’, regardless of whether or not you use them, such as Sports, Rec Center, and Student Health Services. Last year we saw a major court case which bottom-line says that you will be required to help fund organizations you disagree with. As a Senator from the College of Engineering last year, I was intrigued by this socialist setup. I was determined to bond with a few other like-minded Senators to attempt to reform the student fee system and make it more efficient. I fondly remember a senator presenting the idea of a three-tiered payment system for Student Health Services. The proposal was to allow students to choose one of three plans, each corresponding to different services and for different fee amounts. This plan seemed wise to myself and many fellow Senators since a large portion of students never set foot in Health Services or even consider using the place; the official response constituted a blatant rejection of the idea and instead, we actually get to pay even more for that fee this year!

4 ) Attend a Socratic Club debate, one of the few places on campus where an open intellectual discourse is provided for in a fair environment. All topics for debate are chosen by the OSU Socratic Club and relate to issues concerning Christianity. Check the website (http://oregonstate.edu/groups/socratic/) or watch for announcements in the Liberty or Barometer for upcoming debates. Join the College Republicans or Students for Life, or one of the many excellent campus ministries like Chi Alpha, Real Life, or Campus Crusade. Come show your support during the annual display of thousands of crosses in the quad on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade and other conservative events.

5 ) Try to remember, it’s really not that bad. There are a lot of republicans and other conservatives at this university, even within the staff. Our voice may not be heard quite as often or as loud, and is certainly not popular when we do speak up, yet we are here. Besides, you could be at U of O…

There are no suitable words, no analogies or familiar themes with which to identify. It is simply heartbreaking. You force your way through the creaking battered front door and are confronted with a horrendous sight – a home that was submerged in toxic water for almost a month. Some of you may think I am exaggerating, I am not.

OSU Katrina Spring Break on Google Video

The walls are layered in green and black mold, all the furniture is strewn about, over-turned, covered in slimy mold and dirt. The Black Mold is highly hazardous and will start growing in your lungs if you breathe in too much; you hope the N95 face mask is doing its job. The floor squishes as you compress six inches of thick, treacherous, moldy slime beneath, around, and over your feet. The toxic water (affectionately nick-named ‘Katrina Juice’) still isn’t completely gone; it sloshes out of any and every container soaking your boots, gloves and some of your clothes.

The smell hits you immediately, like a garbage dump mixed with rotting vegetables and sewage; that’s probably the best smell you will experience today. You have to breathe through your mouth in order to not throw-up, this fills your face mask with hot air that filters up and fogs your goggles, adding to the uncomfortable muggy heat that’s already making you sweat at 9 AM.

As you gaze at the destruction before you, you keep in mind the spray-painted markings outside which signified ‘no bodies found here’ but your mind flashes… “What if?” At that moment you face the reality that you have volunteered to clean this place. You are one of 80 people from Oregon State University who has volunteered to spend your Spring Break gutting homes in New Orleans, Louisiana.

One ravished home after another, Christian and non-Christian labored side-by-side through the muck and the mire to restore hope to the residents of New Orleans. The OSU Katrina Relief Team was organized through OSU Campus Crusade for Christ in partnership with FEMA, Habitat for Humanity, the University of New Orleans, Tulane University, and churches throughout the Gulf Coast region. OSU and the greater Corvallis area joined with teams from around the Northwest, assembling over 1000 volunteers for the week who cleaned around 100 homes – of which OSU contributed ten. This work saved the residents hundreds of thousands of dollars and in comparison it took Habitat for Humanity over a month to do the equivalent amount of work.

Eastern Washington, the University of Montana, and Oregon State were three of the biggest teams in the entire country. Universities throughout the United States have been sending relief teams to New Orleans and the Gulf Coast region during their respective Spring Breaks, bringing the number of volunteers to around 10,000 over the month of March alone; the entire operation run through Campus Crusade for Christ.

To finance the trip the students had to raise support from the community or pay their own way. This humanitarian outreach has restored hope to countless people who lost everything and paved the way for the re-building process to begin. Every person we helped was so appreciative and amazed that we would do something like this; they did anything they could to return the favor. Usually this amounted to feeding us, which was a wonderful reprieve from the camp food, and a promise to always be ready to help us in any way if we ever happened to travel to New Orleans again.

So as I write this on my flight home, I cannot help but recollect on how amazing this week has been. My hope was that we could make a difference in just one person’s life, and the trip would be worth it. All the disgusting work, the uncomfortable living conditions, having to throw away some of your clothes because they are covered in Black Mold, dirt, and slimy Katrina Juice, the missing pay from my job back at home, missing all the relaxation and fun I could have had on Spring Break elsewhere, the long flights, and not getting to shave for a week, all definitely worth it to help just one person… and OSU helped so many more than one.

Over the past decade Oregon State University has had the prestigious opportunity to be at the center of a great resurgence, nay a revolution, in popular culture throughout the West Coast. Social institutions are in upheaval as a wave a young, mostly college students, take center stage in the revival of a pastime once thought extinct outside of high aristocracy, ballroom dancing.

I was once quite suspicious of any type of dancing; it would be accurate to compare me to that overweight white guy in the movie “Hitch”, trying to groove a bit but just looking ridiculous. A little time, plenty of practice, and a few classes have left me with the ability to waltz around the room at a Masquerade Ball in all the grandeur of European nobleman. Or if given the opportunity, swing to a live jazz band, or break into some Salsa or Cha Cha at a Latin Club, or even perhaps impress the crowd with some smooth foxtrot at a wedding.

One very cold evening in mid December I found myself hurrying along a dark street in downtown Portland; my dress shoes clapping across the concrete and my suit jacket flapping the wind. The 1930’s reminiscent hat I was wearing kept the light rain off my face but did little to quell the biting wind. I made my way down the sidewalk underneath the bright-red neon sign proudly proclaiming “Norse Hall – Dance To-Night” towards the warm and inviting doorway. Up the steps and through the grand doors brought me to the entryway as suddenly a chill ran up my spine. Not like a shiver from being cold, it was an eerie feeling, the kind when you know something a little strange has just happened.

I took a look around at the jazz era décor that graced the establishment. One could almost mistake it for the illustrious Savoy ballroom that hosted the most celebrated swing bands of all time. As the swing music drifted in from the ballroom to the lobby where I stood, it struck me; my Grandfather had stood in this very spot over 60 years ago when he was out swing dancing – back when he attended OSU. The night proceed with an incredible swing band, Stompy Jones, and all the swing dancing you could ever hope for at such a place packed with hundreds of people. It was my great pleasure to recount this story to Grandpa later that week.

Though this is certainly not the normal type of event anymore, it is most definitely one of the best. Most ballroom dances in the mid-Willamette Valley are semi-formal events and encompass a variety of dance styles from foxtrot to rumba. A note to all you fellow engineers out there – there are beautiful girls in ballroom dancing, a lot of them! And they appreciate gentlemen who know how to treat them with respect and lead a decent Tango.

You may have seen an article in the Barometer last term covering one of the great resources for avid OSU dancers; it featured teacher Cathy Dark and the Cool Shoes Ballroom Dance Team. Cathy is one of several excellent dance instructors at OSU and the founder/leader of our ballroom dance team. If you have room for a spare credit or two I highly recommend checking out one of the many PAC dance classes; beginning dance class offerings include Ballroom, Latin, Swing, and Club.

We are fortunate at OSU to not only have a large dance community, but an incredible amount of instruction. Compared to U of O or community classes, OSU far exceeds everyone in both the variety of classes offered and the opportunities for extended instruction, i.e. Ballroom I, II, and III.

More advanced dancers will find the Corvallis area incorporates an active Lindy Hop community as well as a good portion of West Coast Swing enthusiasts. Events outside OSU include Lakepark on Monday nights, Gerlinger Hall at U of O on Friday nights, and a large amount of events in Portland including dances at the Norse Hall Ballroom, Paradise Ballroom, Oak Grove Grange, and Crystal Ballroom.

The Ballroom Club at OSU organizes several large dances every term which are held in the MU Ballroom (downstairs in the MU) as well as weekly practice dances in the Women’s Building. A West Coast Swing Club has just been started at OSU, look for some awesome West Coast activities in the near future.

The Liberty staff cordially invites you to investigate ballroom dancing further by joining us at one of the regular dances in the MU Ballroom or in one of the many PAC dance classes. Information related to the OSU Ballroom Club may be found at http://oregonstate.edu/groups/ballroom